A big one, inspired by ASOIAF. Problem is that when I look at reviews for it I see people talking about the anti-war undertones or deep feminist ideals or criticisms of real world institutes when I don't care about any of that shit
Then you don't need to include it unless you care about validation and marketing from those who do care about them.
Lets be honest, they probably have no idea what the frick they're talking about and will find some 'undertone' in your work that you simply didnt put in there
It needs to have some meaning but all books will have some even by accident
Then you don't need to include it unless you care about validation and marketing from those who do care about them.
Lets be honest, they probably have no idea what the frick they're talking about and will find some 'undertone' in your work that you simply didnt put in there
ASOIAF is a pretty bad example for this then, since the deeper meaning is very much intentional
God damn. You poor bastard. I dont know where to begin. Putting feminism in your story doesnt make it deeper, in fact it would only do the opposite. Neither does an anti-war message, which nearly every piece of media about war has done. If you're opposed to these themes then you can do the exact opposite and write an anti-feminist, pro-war story. And you wouldnt even need to change what you want to write, because apparently this is what you want to explore.
Stop thinking in terms of what's "deep" and what isnt. Because apparently anything praised by a genderless Berkley professor is "deep" by your definition.
The mentally ill pseuds are the only ones who care about that stuff. I just want to read a good political intrigue with engaging characters in a fantasy medieval setting.
I do too. I just bought a couple that look like they fit that mold but it will have to wait until I finish my book on Irish fairy faith and a Ma Jian book after that and maybe a book on Vikings after that. I have an issue where I must autistically read certain genres in a certain order.
yh this sounds true i think if you just try to be happy and make people laugh it kind of creates something deep by itself. If you think about it hard enough youll probably find GOT extremely funny.
OH im A PEDO, PITY ME MY LIFE IS SO FRICKING HARD WHILE I FRICKING MOLEST YOU,
Kill them all lol
Black folk
JEWS
ARABS
all pedos bye bye.
You don't necessarily have to plot out your deeper meaning before, it can come out based on the characters themselves and the consequences you believe their actions would have. For example Ned is a trustworthy nice fella and you have him trust some bad people. Obviously that would mean that he dies. And there you have a "deeper meaning" or a lesson if you will, don't trust evil people. You didn't start out with the intention of teaching the world about how trusting evil people is bad. It just happened to turn out that way.
Most critics and 100% of postmodern critics project and dissemble. They have something they want to say, then use the pretense of literary criticism to say it.
People that talk about feminism or marxism or whatever when they talk about literarure do not understand literature and they will never understand literature even if you explained it to them for a thousand years. Ignore them completely and write so when you read back what you've written you enjoy what you wrote and think it's good. No one else matters but you. You need to write for you. That's where your best writing will come from.
That's a very vague question. I can't imagine a narrative with no meaning at all, so what separates "deep" meaning from normal meaning? What are some examples?
A big one, inspired by ASOIAF. Problem is that when I look at reviews for it I see people talking about the anti-war undertones or deep feminist ideals or criticisms of real world institutes when I don't care about any of that shit
No. Any answer except this is pretentious. A novel need only succeed in what it was trying to do. If it was trying to have a deeper meaning and it successfully conveyed that then it was good. If it was trying to be enjoyable, shallow shlock and it was indeed enjoyable shallow schlock then it was also good. Not everything has to be heavy. Sometimes the author just wants to entertain you or give you something comfy to read on the beach. If it is heavy that's good too but the idea that everything must be serious and everything must have this deep philosophical meaning is unfair. Frankly I think it's unhealthy to only read uber deep and philosophical stuff. Every now and then a man needs to just relax. I myself switch between schlock, history, and deep novel with short stories in between alongside the occasional comic or manga (those are more for waiting rooms and times when I have a bit of a headache and don't feel like focusing too hard).
the only people who care about deeper meaning or allegories are hacks and critics who have never written a page in their life. real writers and artists dont give a frick about deeper meanings, they appreciate the book for how it is and how it was made.
Maybe specify deeper meaning because it is too vague a question. A narrative about the life of a man and a woman can be an allegory for social critique and thus have a deeper meaning in contrast with its basic fictional narrative of the lives of two people. Is there a "good" book that has no "deeper" meaning? Writing words onto a piece of paper objectively comes with meaning because it is a (written) expression of a thought.
The academics and critics won’t consider it “literary” unless it contains a broader socio-economic or civilizational critique AND specifically a critique that does not prefer authentic traditions or religious fundamentalism.
No
Yes
Are you writing YA fiction or big boy fiction?
A big one, inspired by ASOIAF. Problem is that when I look at reviews for it I see people talking about the anti-war undertones or deep feminist ideals or criticisms of real world institutes when I don't care about any of that shit
Then you don't need to include it unless you care about validation and marketing from those who do care about them.
Lets be honest, they probably have no idea what the frick they're talking about and will find some 'undertone' in your work that you simply didnt put in there
>inspired by ASOIAF
yes
The secret of literature is you don't have to do shit with deeper themes and brainlets will imagine them anyway because they want to seem smart
ASOIAF is a pretty bad example for this then, since the deeper meaning is very much intentional
What is the deeper meaning?
Incest le good
nope it isnt.
dont make out with your sister.
God damn. You poor bastard. I dont know where to begin. Putting feminism in your story doesnt make it deeper, in fact it would only do the opposite. Neither does an anti-war message, which nearly every piece of media about war has done. If you're opposed to these themes then you can do the exact opposite and write an anti-feminist, pro-war story. And you wouldnt even need to change what you want to write, because apparently this is what you want to explore.
Stop thinking in terms of what's "deep" and what isnt. Because apparently anything praised by a genderless Berkley professor is "deep" by your definition.
The mentally ill pseuds are the only ones who care about that stuff. I just want to read a good political intrigue with engaging characters in a fantasy medieval setting.
I do too. I just bought a couple that look like they fit that mold but it will have to wait until I finish my book on Irish fairy faith and a Ma Jian book after that and maybe a book on Vikings after that. I have an issue where I must autistically read certain genres in a certain order.
most people want more
Just create an entertaining world.
Putting things for the sake of sounding deep or woke makes a work insist upon itself.
yh this sounds true i think if you just try to be happy and make people laugh it kind of creates something deep by itself. If you think about it hard enough youll probably find GOT extremely funny.
OH im A PEDO, PITY ME MY LIFE IS SO FRICKING HARD WHILE I FRICKING MOLEST YOU,
Kill them all lol
Black folk
JEWS
ARABS
all pedos bye bye.
Elden ring bro not GOT.
climate change is such a hoax
You don't necessarily have to plot out your deeper meaning before, it can come out based on the characters themselves and the consequences you believe their actions would have. For example Ned is a trustworthy nice fella and you have him trust some bad people. Obviously that would mean that he dies. And there you have a "deeper meaning" or a lesson if you will, don't trust evil people. You didn't start out with the intention of teaching the world about how trusting evil people is bad. It just happened to turn out that way.
Most critics and 100% of postmodern critics project and dissemble. They have something they want to say, then use the pretense of literary criticism to say it.
People that talk about feminism or marxism or whatever when they talk about literarure do not understand literature and they will never understand literature even if you explained it to them for a thousand years. Ignore them completely and write so when you read back what you've written you enjoy what you wrote and think it's good. No one else matters but you. You need to write for you. That's where your best writing will come from.
Maybe
The only thing that matters is how well written it is. No deeper meaning required
It needs to have some meaning but all books will have some even by accident
Not really. Deep meaning does not necessarly produce something good.
No, read Hemingway
That's a very vague question. I can't imagine a narrative with no meaning at all, so what separates "deep" meaning from normal meaning? What are some examples?
I mean what is deeper vs normal meaning in that example?
Normal is meaning that's quite obvious, in the forefront. Deeper requires, well, a deeper understanding.
For example, in ASOIAF, the character of Brienne vs the Bear in the bearpit is an allegory for women being oppressed by the patriarchy
Yes
No. Any answer except this is pretentious. A novel need only succeed in what it was trying to do. If it was trying to have a deeper meaning and it successfully conveyed that then it was good. If it was trying to be enjoyable, shallow shlock and it was indeed enjoyable shallow schlock then it was also good. Not everything has to be heavy. Sometimes the author just wants to entertain you or give you something comfy to read on the beach. If it is heavy that's good too but the idea that everything must be serious and everything must have this deep philosophical meaning is unfair. Frankly I think it's unhealthy to only read uber deep and philosophical stuff. Every now and then a man needs to just relax. I myself switch between schlock, history, and deep novel with short stories in between alongside the occasional comic or manga (those are more for waiting rooms and times when I have a bit of a headache and don't feel like focusing too hard).
well said
I think there needs to be a theme in a story, and there will be that people will glean from it whether you intended it or not.
For example - Frodo and Sam, the smallest creatures in Middle-Earth had the biggest impact of all.
Stuff like that imo is necessary. Is that some big philosophical complexity? No, but good works generally have themes and lessons to impart.
No, it just needs soul
>inb4 how do I add soul
just be genuine when writing it
Just write it.
the only people who care about deeper meaning or allegories are hacks and critics who have never written a page in their life. real writers and artists dont give a frick about deeper meanings, they appreciate the book for how it is and how it was made.
Maybe specify deeper meaning because it is too vague a question. A narrative about the life of a man and a woman can be an allegory for social critique and thus have a deeper meaning in contrast with its basic fictional narrative of the lives of two people. Is there a "good" book that has no "deeper" meaning? Writing words onto a piece of paper objectively comes with meaning because it is a (written) expression of a thought.
why do you have to write a novel isnt shitposting all day with your buddies so much more fun. Why dont you write a novel with your buddies.
BIBLE 3 MEIN KAMPF 2: THIS TIME ITS PERSONNAL
The academics and critics won’t consider it “literary” unless it contains a broader socio-economic or civilizational critique AND specifically a critique that does not prefer authentic traditions or religious fundamentalism.
to be goooood? yeah, to be enjoyable? No
Not necessarily but it contributes to it.